US Navy News and updates

[Todjaeger]

Here it is , a New Unmanned Air System for high-altitude, long-endurance and for conducting continuous sustained operations over an area of interest at long ranges.

Northrop Grumman unveiled UAS for the US Navy :MQ-4C Triton for Maritime


What are Some Best UAV/UAS used world wide...and what is the best UAV/UAS used by US Armed Forces

Keep in mind the "best" equipment threads, like vs. threads, are very much frowned up. Partially due to the arguments which get spawned by people advocating 'their' pet piece of kit, and partially because the correct answer is invariably complex, with the arguments are not.

Speaking specifically of UAS, there are differing designs, with different capabilities, to fufill very different roles. It would be sort of like asking the question, "What is better, an F/A-18F Super Hornet, or a C-130J Hercules II." The mission requirements are what would determine which one is better.

-Cheers

 

[gf0012-aust]

the high altitude weaponry slated for P8 will be another interesting game changer...

 

[RobWilliams]

Haha... I'll take "non line of sight datalink" as a yes

Thanks for the video link, very curious about this weapon and glad to know it's fitted to launch from today's VLS. Looks like it'll be a hell of a lot more effective in that role than a few Harpoon tubes and surface-targeted Standards, although I understand the USN's primary ASuW capability is going to come from carrier based air and subsurface assets. Just hope that Australia is keen to procure a few for the Hobarts, future frigate and Collins replacement, given its JASSM roots and comprehensive targeting capabilities I imagine it could do true double duty as a standoff strike weapon as well as an anti-ship missile.

It just got me thinking, because I know that in some quarters there is the thought that because ships haven't fired upon another ship with missiles for quite a while, but with the NLOS datalink it makes them seem like a much more valid weapon system when operating with other assets rather than relying on shipboard sensors.

Just interesting

Cheers for the link CB90!

 

[Bonza]

The thing is designed to fly hundreds of kilometers and pick out and engage a specific target, if need be while operating in a heavy EW environment where it may be denied access to offboard data feeds. Magical stuff.

The airborne LRASM variant seems to have a clear field to replacing Harpoon in USN/USAF service. The ship-launched variant may have to go thru a competitive flyoff vs an anti-ship Tomahawk version if Raytheon supporters in Congress have their way.

From what I remember reading, there were some kind of plans kicking around the Harpoon replacement program to use a Tomahawk variant as an interim anti-ship weapon until the long-term solution was ready, but it was my impression that these plans got cancelled... I do know there was a previous version of Tomahawk with anti-ship capabilities, but it was retired more than ten years ago.

The current Block IV Tomahawk sounds like it has some pretty impressive capabilities and I'm sure it'll be around for years to come, but I hope the anti-ship mission is left to LRASM, or whatever weapon emerges from the program. When put up against the plethora of soft- and hard-kill defensive systems available to a modern surface combatant, I fear that aspects of the Tomahawk might show their age rather rapidly.

You can read a little more about it here (including a report of a test vehicle simulating LRASM having been successfully fired from a Mk. 41 VLS at White Sands as of September 2013):

LRASM Missiles: Reaching for a Long-Range Punch

Edit

the high altitude weaponry slated for P8 will be another interesting game changer...

The more I hear about the P8 the more curious I get... anything that can be shared?

 

[StobieWan]

Ditto on the P8 - we're kicking this around on another forum and I'm flat in the "BUY P8 NOW" camp.

Only sticking points appear to be price and integrating Stingray. Given we p*ssed away more than the cost of a P8 buy on MRA4, I'm thinking "pish and tosh.." and get on with it.

 

[colay]

From what I remember reading, there were some kind of plans kicking around the Harpoon replacement program to use a Tomahawk variant as an interim anti-ship weapon until the long-term solution was ready, but it was my impression that these plans got cancelled... I do know there was a previous version of Tomahawk with anti-ship capabilities, but it was retired more than ten years ago.

The current Block IV Tomahawk sounds like it has some pretty impressive capabilities and I'm sure it'll be around for years to come, but I hope the anti-ship mission is left to LRASM, or whatever weapon emerges from the program. When put up against the plethora of soft- and hard-kill defensive systems available to a modern surface combatant, I fear that aspects of the Tomahawk might show their age rather rapidly.

Yeah, the Navy was considering a Raytheon proposal for an ASh Tomahawk as an interim solution for it's ASuW program but eventually lost interest and did not provide funding to push the concept. This is the same solution that Raytheon is lobbying it's friends in Congress to pit against LRASM in a competition to determine the Navy's next ship-launched AShM. The irony is, if Navy goes with an interim,Tomahawk, it must then develop from,scratch a new missile to eventually replace it which will most likely be LRASM-derived as there don't seem to be any other ongoing projects. So why go for an interim solution in lieu of LRASM which is making good progress and seems almost within reach?

There was an anti-ship variant of the Tomahawk equipped with an active radar seeker a couple of decades back. The Cold War ended and with it the Soviet naval threat and AFAIK the missiles were repurposed to take out land targets.

 

[Volkodav]

I believe the P-8 is likely to carry a glide kit fitted torpedo for high altitude launch. Read it somewhere but can not for the life of me remember where, anyone who knows more please feel free to jump in with info or corrections.

 

[StobieWan]

I believe the P-8 is likely to carry a glide kit fitted torpedo for high altitude launch. Read it somewhere but can not for the life of me remember where, anyone who knows more please feel free to jump in with info or corrections.

It was on Warships - link here to the article not the post:

Boeing to make flying torpedoes able to attack enemy submarines from 30,000 feet - Military & Aerospace Electronics

 

[CB90]

Just hope that Australia is keen to procure a few for the Hobarts, future frigate and Collins replacement, given its JASSM roots and comprehensive targeting capabilities I imagine it could do true double duty as a standoff strike weapon as well as an anti-ship missile.

It probably COULD do double duty and would probably be perfectly capable of hitting a simple GPS/INS point...but if used as an excuse to preclude purchase of a proper strike weapon, I would question the sanity of those involved in the decision making.

A guidance section adds a significant weight/volume penalty...not exactly crippling but it is a lot of space that would otherwise be fuel...or a special purpose warhead...you get the drift. You would essentially be paying for an expensive, highly sophisticated brick to stick on something that just needs to follow a preplanned route and not do a whole lot of hard "thinking" along the way.
There are other reasons, but that alone would make me think - bad idea.

 

[Bonza]

It probably COULD do double duty and would probably be perfectly capable of hitting a simple GPS/INS point...but if used as an excuse to preclude purchase of a proper strike weapon, I would question the sanity of those involved in the decision making.

A guidance section adds a significant weight/volume penalty...not exactly crippling but it is a lot of space that would otherwise be fuel...or a special purpose warhead...you get the drift. You would essentially be paying for an expensive, highly sophisticated brick to stick on something that just needs to follow a preplanned route and not do a whole lot of hard "thinking" along the way.
There are other reasons, but that alone would make me think - bad idea.

I hadn't considered that - the insight is appreciated, thankyou. Getting a bit overexcited about the program I think

 

[colay]

A bird's-eye view of how the Navy sees the CAW and other fleet assets conducting net-centric warfare. Many components are already in place and while others are in varying stages of development but the overall architecture appears to capitalize on the strong points of individual platforms to create desired synergy. In particular, the value of the F-35C is apparent, providing a forward presence in contested airspace denied to other CAW aircraft. UCLASS is envisioned to serve as airborne tanker/ISR provider, downplaying the strike role that some proponents have been clamoring for.



Inside the Navy
Inside the Navy’s Next Air War

The heart of the new plan is a concept known as Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air—or NIFC-CA (pronounced: nif-kah).

The central tenets behind NIFC-CA are situational awareness and extended-range cooperative targeting.

Every unit within the carrier strike group—in the air, on the surface, or under water—would be networked through a series of existing and planned datalinks so the carrier strike group commander has as clear a picture as possible of the battle-space... Beyond situational awareness, NIFC-CA forces naval planners to think creatively about the capabilities of individual platforms within the carrier air wing or even the carrier strike group at large. Under NIFC-CA, the sum of a carrier strike group’s firepower has to be considered in aggregate.

For example, targets spotted hundreds of miles away by one sensor—such as the emerging F-35C Lighting II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) or E-2D Advanced Hawkeye intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft—could be engaged cooperatively by any number of shooters: a JSF, F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet tactical fighter, or future unmanned vehicles, all available to the strike group over vast distances.

The attacking aircraft could cooperate with Arleigh Burke-class (DDG-51) destroyers and even submarines working together as a coherent whole—connected via data-links—under the NIFC-CA construct. With the shared data, the effectiveness of each component in the NIFC-CA web can do more and see more.

“In the past, we bought platforms for platform capabilities,” Manazir said. “Really what we’re buying now, is we’re buying integrated capability to deliver an effect on the maritime battlefield.”

Lots more at the link.

 

[AegisFC]

This months issue of Proceedings has an interesting article about using Aegis BMD to intercept USA-193 back in 2008.

Aegis: A Continuum of Excellence | U.S. Naval Institute

 

[cdxbow]

This months issue of Proceedings has an interesting article about using Aegis BMD to intercept USA-193 back in 2008.

Aegis: A Continuum of Excellence | U.S. Naval Institute

A very interesting article, but this one regarding the use of swarms of autonomous drones as countermeasures was a fascinating glimpse into the future.

 

[colay]

The USN will herald in a new era of combat at sea when it deploys it's first operational laser weapon this year. The attraction to the Navy is obvious and compelling as a hi-tech AAW solution to protect the fleet, in particular the priceless CVNs.



http://www.navytimes.com/article/20140217/NEWS/302170023

Navy ready to deploy laser for 1st time

BATH, MAINE — Some of the Navy’s futuristic weapons sound like something out of “Star Wars,” with lasers designed to shoot down aerial drones and electric guns that fire projectiles at hypersonic speeds.

That future is now.

The Navy plans to deploy its first laser on a ship later this year, and it intends to test an electromagnetic rail gun prototype aboard a vessel within two years.

MORE...

 

[blackknight]

Yes, the United States are ahead of the game when it comes to research and development of swarms autonomous systems. I believe that in futire battlefields swarms of drone will be deployed in great numbers. The good news is thet the number of casualties will be significantly reduced.

 

[colay]

Sec. Hagel has clarified DoD's future direction as regard to LCS and a possible "lethal small surface combatant" to reflect changing threat environments. Recent initiatives e.g. LRASM, lasers, etc. could endow significant offensive/defensive punch not previously available.

http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1831

FY15 Budget Preview

As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Pentagon Press Briefing Room, Monday, February 24, 2014


"...Regarding the Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship, I am concerned that the Navy is relying too heavily on the LCS to achieve its long-term goals for ship numbers. Therefore, no new contract negotiations beyond 32 ships will go forward. With this decision, the LCS line will continue beyond our five-year budget plan with no interruptions.

The LCS was designed to perform certain missions – such as mine sweeping and anti-submarine warfare – in a relatively permissive environment. But we need to closely examine whether the LCS has the independent protection and firepower to operate and survive against a more advanced military adversary and emerging new technologies, especially in the Asia Pacific. If we were to build out the LCS program to 52 ships, as previously planned, it would represent one-sixth of our future 300-ship Navy. Given continued fiscal restraints, we must direct future shipbuilding resources toward platforms that can operate in every region and along the full spectrum of conflict.

Additionally, at my direction, the Navy will submit alternative proposals to procure a capable and lethal small surface combatant, generally consistent with the capabilities of a frigate. I’ve directed the Navy to consider a completely new design, existing ship designs, and a modified LCS. These proposals are due to me later this year in time to inform next year’s budget submission...".

 

[Volkodav]

Interesting, I suppose if they drop the 40-45kt requirement it would be possible to go for a larger platform that has the desired frigate combat system but can still retain the LCS type flexibility. Remember the USN used to operate a variety of destroyer / destroyer escort types to cover mine laying, mine sweeping, fast transport, fast destroyer escorts (DDE) for ASW etc. Maybe a modular FFG could be developed trading speed for displacement and volume.

 

[CB90]

I'd be perfectly happy to see something comparable to the PLAN's Jiangkai II's. Something like:

Small VLS (~32 cell)
High end ASW ASUW systems.
Local AAW

No unusual speed requirement. Could also be a jack of all trades to do the low end stuff we don't need billion dollar ships doing.

 

[RobWilliams]

Type 26 anyone?

Might be a bit big though, LCS is around 3,000 as opposed to 6,000

 

[CB90]

Type 26 anyone?

Might be a bit big though, LCS is around 3,000 as opposed to 6,000

I think usage of non-common systems (Rolls Royce turbines, sonar, radars) would be the biggest hurdle.

The OHP FFGs had a lot of common components with DDGs and CGs. So it would depend on how hard it would be to modify the design to streamline the logistics bit.